arxiv: v6 [math.gr] 22 Feb 2012

Transcription

1 ALGEBRAIC PROPERTIES OF PROFINITE GROUPS arxiv: v6 [math.gr] 22 Feb 2012 NIKOLAY NIKOLOV Abstract. Recently there has been a lot of research and progress in profinite groups. We survey some of the new results and discuss open problems. A central theme is decompositions of finite groups into bounded products of subsets of various kinds which give rise to algebraic properties of topological groups. 1. Profinite groups The classification of finite simple groups has transformed the study of finite groups and this in turn has brought a wealth of results about infinite groups with various finiteness conditions. One such obvious class is the residually finite groups. Frequently questions about such groups can be reduced to asymptotic properties of their finite images and a natural tool for studying these is the profinite groups. A profinite group is a compact Hausdorff topological group G which is totally disconnected, i.e. any connected component of G is a singleton. It is a classical result due to van Dantzig [81] that the last condition is equivalent to the following: any open subset of G containing the identity contains an open normal subgroup. The diagonal embedding i : G G/N N og is a topological isomorphism and the image i(g) is the inverse limit of the set F(G) = {G/N N o G} of topological finite images of G. Conversely the inverse limit lim Γ i of any inverse system of finite groups (Γ i ) is a profinite group. For details of these constructions and basic properties of profinite groups we refer the reader to [67], [77] or [83]. Profinite groups appeared first in number theory, in the first instance as a tool for studying congruences, namely the ring of p-adic integers Z p and second as Galois groups of normal separable algebraic extensions. They form a part of the more general theories of compact groups and totally disconnected locally compact groups. For example the stabilizer of a vertex in the group of automorphisms of a locally finite tree is naturally a profinite group. Profinite groups feature in arithmetic geometry: the etale fundamental group π(x) of a curve X of genus at least 2 defined overanumber field k maps onto a Gal(k) and a famous conjecture of Grothendieck claims a bijection between the rational points X(k) and the conjugacy classes of sections for this map, see [37]. Let us mention another important example, the compact p-adic analytic groups. For our purposes we can define them here as the closed subgroups of GL n (Z p ). These groups were first studied by M. Lazard[43] as the non-archimedian equivalent of Lie groups, i.e. the compact topological groups which are analytic over Z p. This 1

2 2 NIKOLAY NIKOLOV was continued by Mann and Lubotzky, in particular they obtained the following group theoretic characterization of p-adic groups. Theorem 1 ([16]). A pro-p group G is p-adic analytic if and only if G has finite rank. Here and below by rank we mean Prüfer rank, i.e. the smallest integer d such that any subgroup of a finite topological quotient G/N of N is d-generated. The applications of profinite groups in other branches of mathematics are often via profinite completions: Let Γ be a residually finite group. We can define the profinite topology on Γ by declaring the open sets to be the unions of cosets of subgroups of finite index of Γ. This makes Γ into a Hausdorff totally disconnected group and we can define ˆΓ to be the completion of Γ with respect to this topology. A concrete way to construct ˆΓ is as the closure of i(γ) in N G/N where N ranges over all subgroups of finite index in G and i is the diagonal embedding of Γ. In this wayγis a subgroupofits profinite completion ˆΓ and propertiesofγcan be deduced from those of ˆΓ. We can define the pro-p, pronilpotent or prosoluble completion of Γ in a similar way using the normal subgroups N of G such that G/N is a finite p-group, finite nilpotent or finite soluble group respectively. A good illustration of the success of this approach is the Lubotzky s linearity condition (see [16], Interlude B). Theorem 2. A finitely generated group Γ is linear over a field of characteristic 0 if and only if there is a chain of normal subgroups Γ > Γ 1 > Γ 2 of finite index in Γ with i Γ i = 1 such that the inverse limit of the groups {Γ/Γ i } i is a p-adic analytic group. Equivalently the family {Γ/Γ i } i has bounded Prüfer rank. By contrast no such description is known for linear groups over fields of positive characteristic. Other applications of profinite groups include: the study of subgroup growth in residually finite groups [52], the congruence subgroup problem [51], the classification of p-groups of given coclass [44]. 2. Profinite groups as profinite completions We explained how a finitely generated residually finite group gives rise to a profinite group, namely its profinite completion. One may ask, conversely if every profinite group is the completion of some finitely generated residually finite abstract group. A moment s thought shows that the answeris no: The p-adic integersz p are not the profinite completion of any finitely generated group. We must change the question to: Which profinite groups are completions of finitely generated groups? Let us call such a profinite group a profinite completion. This is the same as asking: which collections of finite groups can be the images of some finitely generated residually finite group? The following example shows that we should not expect an easy answer: Example: Let G be a profinite group with polynomial subgroup growth which is not virtually soluble. A discrete (respectively profinite) group G is said to have polynomial subgroup growth if there is some integer d such that G has at most n d (open) subgroups of index n for each n N. Profinite groups with polynomial subgroup growth were characterised by Segal and Shalev, see Theorem 10.3 in [52]. For example we can take G to be a cartesian product i=1 PSL 2(p i ) for a fast increasing sequence of primes p i. If G is the

3 ALGEBRAIC PROPERTIES OF PROFINITE GROUPS 3 completion of a residually finite finitely generated group Γ then Γ has polynomial subgroup growth as well. But then by a theorem of Mann, Lubotzky, Segal, (see [52] Theorem 5.1) Γ must be a virtually soluble group of finite rank and hence so is G, contradiction. In fact a linearity criterion first proved by J. Wilson (see [52], Proposition (ii)) shows that i=1 PSL 2(p i ) is not a profinite completion for any infinite sequence of primes p i, see [73] for the full argument. It is relaively easy to describe the nilpotent profinite groups which are profinite completions: These are the profinite groups commensurable with p G(Z p) where G is a unipotent algebraic group defined over Z. There are only a few special classes of profinite groups which are known to be profinite completions, among them are iterated wreath products of finite simple groups and semisimple profinite groups. From now on we make the convention that a finite simple group means a nonabelian finite simple group. Theorem 3 ([74]). Let S 1,S 2,..., be a sequence of nonabelian finite simple groups, each with a transitive action as a permutation group. Form the wreath product W k = S 1 S 2 S k and let G be the inverse limit of the groups W k. Then G is a profinite completion. In [74] the proof assumes an extra condition on the actions of the S i but this is unnecessary, see the remark in [52], page 266. In particular any collection of finite simple groups can be the composition factors of the finite images of some finitely generated residually finite group. A profinite group G which is a Cartesian product of nonabelian finite simple group is called semisimple. The next example characterises the semisimple groups which are profinite completions. Theorem 4 ([33]). Let G = i=1 S i be a semisimple profinite group which is topologically finitely generated. Then G is a profinite completion if and only if for each n only finitely many of the groups S i are groups of Lie type of dimension n. The dimension of S i is the dimension of the complex Lie algebra associated to the Lie type of S i. Another natural question is: Can two nonisomorphic residually finite groups have the same profinite completions? The answer is yes, even in the case of nilpotent groups, see [72], Chapter 11, Corollary 4. The following strong counterexample was constructed by Bridson and Grunewald [13] answering a question posed by Grothendieck: Theorem 5. There exist two finitely presented residually finite groups Γ 1,Γ 2 with an injection i : Γ 1 Γ 2 such that the induced map î : ˆΓ 1 ˆΓ 2 is an isomorphism but Γ 1 and Γ 2 are not isomorphic. In [50] the authors show that counterexamples to Grothendieck s question as in Theorem 5 cannot exist within arithmetic hyperbolic 3-manifold groups and pose the following Question 6. Suppose that M 1 and M 2 are geometric 3-manifolds with infinite fundamental group for which the profinite completions π 1 (M 1 ) and π 1 (M 2 ) are isomorphic. Are M 1 and M 2 homeomorphic?

4 4 NIKOLAY NIKOLOV It turns out that there exist uncountably many pairwise non-isomorphic finitely generated residually finite groups with the same profinite completion, see [62]. On the other hand it is a theorem of Grunewald, Pickel and Segal [22] that there are only finitely many polycyclic groups with a given profinite completion. Similar result has been proved by Aka [4] for simple arithmetic groups with the congruence subgroup property. However when we turn to more general classes of groups even the following is open, see [23]: Question 7 (Remeslennikov). A finitely generated residually finite group Γ has the same profinite completion as the free group on two generators F 2. Must Γ be isomorphic to F 2? If Γ is two generated then Γ must indeed be isomorphic to F 2 : Any surjection π : F 2 Γ gves rise to a surjection ˆπ : ˆF 2 ˆΓ ˆF 2 of their profinite completions. Now a finitely generated profinite group G is non-hopfian, i.e. any surjection from G to G is an isomorphisms. Therefore ˆπ is an isomorphism and hence so is π. So Question 7 is really about groups Γ which need more than 2 generators. We remark that the analogous question for pro-p completions has a negative answer: There exist groups Γ which are not free but have the same set of nilpotent images as a free group. Such groups are called parafree, for examples see [9]. When we consider profinite completions of finitely presented groups there are a few more restrictions. First let us make two definitions. A group G is large if it has a subgroup of finite index H which maps homomorphically onto a nonabelian free group. Similarly G is said to be p-large for a prime p if H above can be taken to be a subnormal subgroup with [G : H] a power of p. Clearly a large group G will have a lot of finite images, in particular any finite group will appear as an image of a finite index subgroup of G. For a prime p a chain of subgroups (G i ) is called an abelian p-series of rapid descent if G i > G i+1 G p i [G i,g i ] for all i N and lim inf i dim Fp G i /G i+1 [G : G i ] > 0. The following theorem has been proved by M. Lackenby in [40]. Theorem 8. A finitely presented group G has an abelian p-series of rapid descent if and only if G is p-large. As a corollary if two finitely presented groups have isomorphic profinite completions then one of them is large if and only if the other is large. 3. Rigidity of profinite groups Let G be a profinite group. What happens if we take the profinite completion of Gitself? SincetheopensubgroupsofGhavefiniteindextheprofinitetopologyonG contains the original topology but could it be strictly stronger? In [77] Serre asked this question in the form: Assuming that G is (topologically) finitely generated is it true that every finite index subgroup of G open? Here and below we say that a profinite group is finitely generated if it contains a dense finitely generated subgroup. Let us call a profinite group G rigid (or strongly complete) if every subgroup of finite index is open in G. It is easy to see that there exist non-rigid groups which

5 ALGEBRAIC PROPERTIES OF PROFINITE GROUPS 5 are not finitely generated. For example if G = Cp ℵ0 then G has 2 2ℵ 0 subgroups of index p of which only ℵ 0 are open. Even worse: the same abstract group can support two inequivalent topologies as a profinite group: The group G = i=1 C p i is abstractly isomorphic to G 1 = G Z p but there is no continuous isomorphism between G and G 1. More generally in [35] J. Kiehlmann has classified all countably based abelian pro-p groups up to continuous and up to abstract isomorphisms. When G is a finitely generated pro-p group then Serre himself proved in [77] that G is rigid. Increasing general cases were proved by Anderson [5], Hartley [26], Segal [71] until in 2003 the author and D. Segal answered Serre s question in the positive: Theorem 9 ([56]). Every finitely generated profinite group is rigid. In particular all homomorphisms between finitely generated profinite groups are automatically continuous and each such group is its own profinite completion. 4. Word width in finite and profinite groups The proofof Theorem 9 relies on bounded width of commutators and other words in finite groups. It is a standart result observed by Brian Hartley that algebraic properties of a profinite group G are equivalent to asymptotic properties of the collection F(G) of finite continuous images of G. For example G is topologically finitely generated if and only if there is some d such that any member of F(G) is generated by d elements. For a subset X of G let us write X n = {x 1 x n x i G} The following proposition is crucially used when proving that some subgroups of G are closed. Proposition10. Let X = X 1 be a closed subset of a profinite group G. The group H = X is closed in G if and only if there is some n N such that H = X n. In turn this condition is equivalent to X n = H for the images X, H of X and H in every Ḡ F(G). A typical application is where X is the set G q := {x q x G} of q-powers in G or the set of commutators [x,y] in G. We can summarize the main results of [56] and [57] as follows. Theorem 11. Let d,q N and let Γ be a finite d-denerated group. There exist functions f 1 (d,q) and f 2 (d) such that 1. Every element of Γ q is a product of at most f 1 powers x q. i.e. Γ q = Γ f1 q. 2. For a normal subgroup N of Γ the group [N,Γ] generated by the set Y = {[n,g] n N,g Γ} is equal to Y f2. The proof of this theorem has recently been streamlined in [55] and we shall indicate some of the main ingredients in section 8 below. Proposition 10 now gives Corollary 12. Let G be a finitely generated profinite group. For any integer q and any closed normal subgroup N of G the algebraically defined subgroups G q and [N,G] are closed in G. In particular the terms of the lower central series {γ i (G)} i=1 of G are closed.

6 6 NIKOLAY NIKOLOV Corollary 12 implies that G/G q is a profinite group and therefore is an inverse limit of finite d-generated groups of exponent q. By the solution of the restricted Burnside problem by Zelmanov [85] the sizes of these finite groups are bounded, i.e. G/G q is finite and therefore G q is open. Theorem 9 is now an easy consequence: Let H be a subgroup of index q in a finitely generated profinite group G. We want to prove that H is open. Without loss of generality we may assume that H is normal in G and hence H G q, which is open in G by the above argument. Hence H is open in G. In fact the use of Zelmanov s theorem above was not strictly speaking necessary and it can be avoided if one just wants to prove Theorem 9. This was done in [56] (which was published before it was known that G q is closed), and a simplified argument can be found in [55], section 5.1, using Theorem 36 below. One might ask whether Corollary 12 extends to other algebraically defined subgroups of G, for example verbal subgroups. Let us make this more precise. Let w = w(x 1,...x k ) be an element of the free group on x 1,...,x k, we shall refer to w as a word in x i. The set G w := {w(g 1,...,g k ) ±1 g i G} is called the set of values of w in G. It is clearly a closed subset of G when G is a profinite group. The verbal subgroup w(g) is defined as w(g) := G w. The word w is said to have width at most n in a group G if w(g) = G n w. Then the verbal subgroup w(g) is closed in G if and only if there is some n N such that w(ḡ) = Ḡ n w for all finite continuous images Ḡ in F(G). If this is so we shall say that w has bounded width in the family F(G). Question 13. For which words w it is true that w(g) is closed in all finitely generated profinite groups G? This is equivalent to w having bounded width in all finite d-generated groups. Theorem 11 provides us with many such words: Corollary 14. Let d N. Suppose that w is either a non-commutator word (i.e. w F ) or the word w = [x 1,x 2,...,x m ]. Then w has bounded width in all finite d-generated groups. Could the above corollary hold for all words? This is not true: Romankov [69] gave an example of 3-generated pro-p group G such that the second derived group G is not closed, i.e. the width of the word [[x 1,x 2 ],[x 3,x 4 ]] is unbounded in d- generated finite p-groups. The most definitive describition so far has been achieved by A. Jaikin-Zapirain [31] who has answered Question 13 for pro-p groups. Theorem 15. Let w 1 be a word in a free group F. The following are equivalent: 1. w(g) is closed in all finitely generated pro-p groups G. 2. w F (F ) p. Let us call a word w a J-word if w F (F ) p for any prime p. It is clear that w must be a J-word for w(g) to be closed in each finitely generated profinite group G. Is the converse true? No counterexample is known to this question. D. Segal [75] has proved that if w is a J-word then w(g) is closed in all finitely generated soluble profinite groups G. Natural candidates to try next are the Engel words [x 1,x 2,...,x 2 ].

7 ALGEBRAIC PROPERTIES OF PROFINITE GROUPS 7 Could Question 13 have a positive answer for all words in some restricted class of groups? It turns out that this is the case if we consider only p-adic analytic groups: Theorem 16. [31] Let G be a compact p-adic analytic group and let w be any word. Then w(g) is closed. L. Pyber has asked if this holds in greater generality for finitely generated adelic groups, i.e. closed subgroups of p GL n(z p ). Dan Segal [76] has answered this question in the positive for adelic groups which have the property FAb, i.e. every open subgroup has finite abelianization. A related question is: Question 17. Let w be a word and r N. Is there f = f(w,r) such that for any p-adic analytic group G of rank r the width of w in G is at most f(w,r)? The other extreme to p-groups is the family of finite simple groups. A finite simple group is generated by 2 elements, so Thereom 11 implies that the word width of any power word x q 1 or [x 1,x 2 ] in the finite simple groups is bounded (a result proved in [53] and [70] earlier and in fact an essential ingredient in the proof of Theorem 11). Much better bounds are now known for all words. Theorem 18 ([41]). Let w be a word and S be a finite simple group. If the size of S is big enough as a function of w alone, then S = S w S w, i.e. w has width 2 in S. It follows that w(g) is closed in all semisimple profinite groups G. The obviousexample w = x q 1 with q dividing S shows that 2 is the best possible bound in Theorem 18 in general. This is the essentially the only example we know where the word map is not surjective on finite simple groups. The following has been proved by Liebeck, Shalev, O Brien and Tiep [47]. Theorem 19 (Ore Conjecture). If S is a finite simple group then every element of S is a commutator. A. Shalev (private communication) has suggested the following problem: Let w be a word which is not a proper power. If S is a finite simple group of Lie type of large enough rank or a large alternating group then S = S w Word width in discrete groups. Moving away from profinite groups let us say a few words about words in abstract groups. One of the first people to investigate word width was Philip Hall, who formulated a series of conjectures about verbal subgroups, see [68], Chapter 4.2. Hall s definition of elliptic words is the same as our definition of words of finite width we have adopted here. Hall s student P. Stroud [79] proved that any word has finite width in an abelian-bynilpotent group. Independently Romankov [69] proved the same result for virtually polycyclic groups. D. Segal [75] recently extended this and proved that the word width in virtually soluble minimax groups is always finite. One might expect that most words will have infinite width in a free group and this is indeed correct: A. Rhemtulla [65] showed that with the exception of trivial cases a word has infinite width in free products. This has recently been generalized to hyperbolic groups [54]. Some open problems remain: Question 20. Let Γ be a centre by metabelian group (i.e. Γ/Z(Γ) is metabelian). Is it true that some word w has infinite width in Γ?

8 8 NIKOLAY NIKOLOV Question 21. Let Γ be a finitely generated soluble group. Is it true that the commutator word [x 1,x 2 ] has finite width in Γ? This has been answered affirmatively by Rhemtulla [66] when Γ has derived length at most 3. It is open for the free soluble group on two generators of derived length Fibres of word maps Let Γ be a finite or infinite group. We can consider a word w F k as a map (g 1,...,g k ) w(g 1,...,g k ) from Γ (k) Γ and investigate the properties of this map. For an element g Γ let us write P Γ (w,g) = {x Γ(k) w(x) = g} Γ k This is the probability of satisfying w(x) = g in Γ for a random k-tuple x Γ (k). A word w is said to be measure preserving (in finite groups) if P Γ (w,g) = Γ 1 for all finite groups Γ and all g Γ. An example is any primitive word, i.e. an element of a free basis of the free group F k. In fact a word w is measure preserving if and only if w is a primitive element in the free profinite group ˆF k, see [61], Section 6. T. Gelander has conjectured that conversely any measure preserving word must be primitive in F k. D. Puder [61] proved this in the case of F 2. Very recently this has been extended by D. Puder and O. Parzanchevski to all words. Theorem 22 ([60]). Let w F k. Then w is measure preserving in all finite groups if and only if w is primitive. Let us mention another intriguing open problem concerning the fibres of the word map. If Γ is abelian then the word map is a homomorphism and P Γ (w,e) = w(γ) 1 Γ 1, in particularp Γ (w,e) is bounded awayfrom 0 for any wordw. A. Amit (unpublished) asked whether this property characterizes all soluble groups. The combined results in [1] and [58] answer this affirmatively (without using the classification): Theorem 23. Let Γ be a finite group. Then Γ is soluble if and only if there exists ǫ > 0 such that for any word w F k we have P Γ (w,e) ǫ. Amit raised the following Question 24. Is it true that when Γ is a finite nilpotent group and w F k is a word then P Γ (w,e) Γ 1? M. Levy [48] has answered this in the positive when Γ has nilpotency class 2. The general case remains open. When we consider P Γ (w,g) for a finite simple group Γ, Larsen and Shalev [42]have proved the following with applications to subgroup growth and representation varieties. Theorem 25. Given a word w there is ǫ = ǫ(w) > 0 and N = N(w) such that for any finite simple group S of size at least N and any g S we have P S (w,g) < S ǫ.

9 ALGEBRAIC PROPERTIES OF PROFINITE GROUPS 9 It turns out that some words are almost measure preserving in the finite simple groups. In order to define what this means, let us write for X G P G (w,x) = g X P G(w,g). Definition 26. A word w F k is said to be almost measure preserving in a family A of finite groups if for any ǫ > 0 there is N = N(ǫ) such that for any G A with G > N and any subset X G we have P G (w,x) X G < ǫ. In [19] S. Garionand A. Shalev showthat the commutatorword[x 1,x 2 ] is almost measure preserving in all finite simple groups. This has diverse applications, in particular to Theorem 46 below. Similar result for the words x n 1x m 2 have been proved by M. Larsen and A. Shalev (work in preparation). 6. Profinite groups of type IF A finitely generated profinite group has only finitely many open subgroups of any given index. Let is call a profinite group with the latter property a group of type IF. Similarly let us define a profinite group to be of type AF if it has finitely many subgroup of any given finite index (which may or may not be open in G). Clearly AF implies IF and IF is equivalent to AF for rigid profinite groups. A profinite group of type AF may not be finitely generated as the example H = n 5 A(n!)n n shows: It is clear that H has type IF while on the other hand from Theorem 18 it follows that H q is open in H for any q which shows that H is rigid. ItisnottoohardtoshowthatarigidprofinitegroupGmusthaveAF(andsoalso IF), a result first proved in [59]. Indeed otherwise G will maps topologically onto a Cartesian product L = i=1 S i of isomorphic finite simple groups S i S (maybe abelian). Choose a non-principal ultrafilter U on N and consider the ultraproduct L/K where K = {(g i ) L the set {i g i = e} U}. Then L/K S and so K is a normal subgroup of finite index in L which is not open. Thus L is not rigid and neither is G. In fact [78] proves that a profinite group G is rigid if and only if it has type AF. One is led therefore to ask whether Theorem 9 can be generalized to all IF-groups, i.e. could it be that all IF-groups are rigid. However this is not true: Proposition 27. There exists a group of type IF which is not rigid. The idea of the proof is to use square width: Define sw(g) to be the smallest integer k (if it exists) such that any element of G 2 is a product of k squares and set sw(g) = otherwise. We shall find a sequence of finite groups {Γ n } n=5 such that: 1. Γ n = Γ n 2. Γ n has a unique maximal normal subgroup K n such that Γ n /K n A n. 3. sw(γ n ) n. If we then take G = n=5 Γ n then condition 2 implies that G has type IF. On the other hand condition 3 and Proposition 10 imply that G 2 G hence G has a subgroup of index 2 which cannot be open by condition 1.

10 10 NIKOLAY NIKOLOV Let Q n be a perfect finite group with sw(q n ) > 2n 2. Such a group exists for any n by [30], Lemma 2.2. Put Γ n = Q n A n = Q n (n) A n. It is clear that Γ n satisfies 1 and 2. As for the third condition I claim that cw(γ n ) cw(q n )/2n n. To prove this let s = cw(γ n ) and express the element g = (x,1,1,,1) Q n (n) as a product of s squares in Γ n : s g = (b i π i ) 2, b i = (b i (1),...,b i (n)) Q n (n), π i A n. i=1 By collecting the elements of the base group to the left we reach the equation g = s i=1 b i αi β b i i where α i,β i aresome permutationsfroma n. Nowif wemultiply together all the coordinates of the elements on both sides of this equation we reach the equation x = U where U is product of elements b i (j) Q n (i = 1,...,s, j = 1,...,n) in some order, each appearing exactly twice. Now we only need to observe that by the proposition below U is a product of at most 2sn squares. Since x Q n was arbitrary this implies that sw(q n ) 2ns = 2n sw(γ n ) which was what we were after. Proposition 28. Let Γ be a group and let U be a product of length 2m of elements c 1,...,c m in some order, each appearing exactly twice. Then U is a product of 2m 1 squares. Proof: Suppose that U = c r V 1 c r V 2, where V 1 V 2 does not involve c r. Then U = (c r V 1 ) 2 V 2 1 V 1 V 2 and by induction we may assume that V 1 V 2 is a product of 2m 3 squares. 7. Presentations and cohomology Let Γ be a finite group with generating set of minimal size equal to d. Then Γ = F d /N is a quotient of the free group F d on the set X = {x 1,...,x d } by a normal subgroup N. By a minimal presentation for Γ we mean a presentation X R where R is a set of relators with R as small as possible and we define r(γ) = R. At the same time Γ is a quotient of the free profinite group on X, ˆFd. By a profinite presentation of Γ we mean a pair X R 1 where R 1 ˆF d such that Γ ˆF d /U, with U := R ˆF d 1, the closed normal subgroup of ˆF d generated by R 1. Again a minimal profinite presentation is one where R 1 is as small as possible and we set ˆr(Γ) = R 1. We can view every abstract presentation of Γ as profinite presentation and this shows that ˆr(Γ) r(γ). It is a well-known problem whether this is always an equality. Question 29. Is there a finite group Γ with ˆr(Γ) < r(γ)? The motivation for this question is that unlike r(γ) the quantity ˆr(Γ) can in theory be computed from the representation theory of Γ, a classic result of Gruenberg, for the formula see Proposition of [52]. In particular for a finite p-group P ˆr(P) = H 2 (P,F p ). A case of interest is when Γ is a finite simple group: In [24] the authors show that ˆr(Γ) 18 and ˆr(A n ) 4. As for abstract presentation of finite simple groups in another paper [25] the same authors prove that r(γ) 80 with r(a n ) 8.

11 ALGEBRAIC PROPERTIES OF PROFINITE GROUPS 11 Let us return to Serre s result that any finite index subgroup in a finitely generated pro-p group is open. It can be restated in the following way: any homomorphism from G to (F p,+) is continuous. For a profinite group G and a finite topological G-module M (which just means that C G (M) is open in G) define Hc n (G,M) to be usual cohomology group defined as the quotient Zc n(g,m)/bn c (G,M) of the groups of continuous n-cocycles and n-coboundaries from G to M. Similarly, let Ha(G,M) n be the analogue defined without requiring continuity of the cocycles or coboundaries. It is easy to see that Hc n(g,m) embeds in Hn a (G,M). For example when M is a trivial module Hc(G,M) 1 is the additive group of continuous homomorphisms from G to (M,+), while Ha 1 (G,M) is the group of all abstract homomorphisms. Serre sresultcannowbe restatedashc 1(G,F p) = Ha 1(G,F p)providedhc 1(G,F p) is finite. It is natural to ask if the higher dimensional analogue of this holds. Question 30. Let G be a finitely presented pro-p group (i.e. H 1 c(g,f p ) and H 2 c (G,F 2) are finite). Is it true that H 2 a (G,F p) = H 2 c (G,F p)? ItisnottoohardtoseethattheconditionthetGisfinitelypresentedisnecessary, see [17]. A case of special interest is when G is a p-adic analytic group, which has been answered affirmatively for Chevalley and soluble p-adic groups by [80]. Sury s result concerns non-compact Chevalley groups over Q p and his methods have been extended to cover the compact Chevalley group SL 2 (Z p ) as well by Barnea, Jaikin- Zapirain and Klopsch (work in preparation). Another of their results is that a positive answer to Question 30 for free pro-p groups implies a positive answer in general for all finitely presented pro-p groups. The groups H 2 (G,F p ) (abstract or continuous) parametrize the equivalence classes of (abstract or continuous) extensions of F p by G. Thus the following are equivalent for a pro-p group G: 1. H 2 a(g,f p ) = H 2 c(g,f p ). 2. Any central extension of C p by G (i.e. a group K with a normal central subroup C of order p such that K/C G) is isomorphic to a pro-p group. 3. Any central extension of C p by G is residually finite. Using this nowit is immedate that H 2 a (G,F p) H 2 c (G,F p) whengisnot finitely presented: Let G = F/N where F is a finitely generated free pro-p group and N is a closed normal subgroup. If G is not finitely presented then N/[N,F]N p is infinite elementary abelian pro-p group and hence it has a subgroup N > K > [N,F]N p of index p in N which is not closed. This F/K is an extension of C p = N/K by G = F/N which is not residually finite. Similarly one can prove the following: Proposition 31. Let G be a pro-p group which is an extension of finitely generated pro-p group N by a finitely generated profinite group H = G/N. Suppose that H 2 a (N,F p) = H 2 c (N,F p) and H 2 a (U,F p) = H 2 c (U,F p), for any open subgroup U of H. Then H 2 a(g,f p ) = H 2 c(g,f p ). Proof: FirstnotethattheconditiononH impliesthatanyextensione ofafinite p-group P by H is residually finite and so topological. This is proved by induction on P the case when P = C p being part of the assumptions. For the induction step let Z be the centre of P. Then H = E/P acts on the finite group Z, so by replacing H by an open subgroup (and E by a finite index subgroup) we may assume that

12 12 NIKOLAY NIKOLOV Z Z(E). Let C be a subgroup of order p in Z, then by considering E/C and the induction hypothesis we may assume that E/C is residually finite and in particular E has a finite index subgroup E 1 with E 1 P = C. Then E 1 /C E 1 P/P is isomorphic to an open subgroup of H, so by assumption E 1 is a redisually finite extension, so there is a finite index subgroup K of E 1 with C K = 1. This implies that E itself is residually finite. Now we can easily finish the proof: Let C p J K be an extension of C p Z(K) by G K/C p where K/J H and J/C p N. Since G is residually finite it is enough to find a subgroup M of finite index in K with C p M = 1. From the assumption on N we know that J is residually finite and finitely generated topologically, thus we may find a subgroup S J with [J : S] <, such that S K and S C p = 1. Consider now K/S which is an extension of the finite p-group J/S by H K/J and so by the argument above there is some finite index subgroup M/S in K/S with 1 = M/S (C p S)/S = (M C p S)/S, this C p M = 1. Proposition 31 shows that Question 30 for p-adic analytic groups reduces to the case when G is a simple p-adic analytic group i.e. whose Lie algebra is simple. A first test case will be G = SD 1 ( p ), the group ofnorm 1 elements in the quaternion division algebra over Z p. For definition of this group see Exercise 9.3 in Chapter I of [36]. 8. Strange images of profinite groups In this section we present some recent results of D. Segal and the author in [55]. Let G be a finitely generated profinite group. We can interpret Theorem 9 as saying that every finite quotient of G is topological. What can we say about other quotients? Suppose first that G/N is a residually finite quotient, then it must be a profinite group. Indeed N is an intersection of finite index subgroups each of which is open and hence closed in G. Therefore N is a closed subgroup of G i.e. the induced topology on G/N makes it into a profinite group. As a consequence G cannot have a countably infinite residually finite quotient. Could it be that G has a countably infinite quotient? The answer is perhaps surprisingly yes. For example let G = p P F p (product over the set P of all primes p). Take a non-principal ultrafilter on P and let G/K be the ultraproduct. Then G/K is an field of characteristic 0, which maps onto Q as an additive group. Therefore (Q,+) is an image of G. Similar argument shows that Z p maps onto Q (use that Q p is a vector space over Q). More generally any infinite abelian profinite group has a countable infinite image. Let us then put a further restriction on the image: Could a profinite group have a finitely generated infinite image? The answer is no, even more generally for compact Hausdorff groups: Theorem 32. [55] Let G be a compact group and N a normal subgroup of (the underlying abstract group) G such that G/N is finitely generated. Then G/N is finite. We can in addition provide some information about possible countable images: Theorem 33. Let G be a finitely generated profinite group. Let N be a normal subgroup of (the underlying abstract group) G. If G/N is countably infinite then G/N has an infinite virtually-abelian quotient.

13 ALGEBRAIC PROPERTIES OF PROFINITE GROUPS 13 The last condition implies that G has an open subgroup K such that K/K is infinite. This is also easily seen to be sufficient for the existence of countable infinite quotients: Corollary 34. Let G be a finitely generated profinite group. Then G has a countably infinite quotient if and only if some open subgroup of G has infinite abelianization. Note that if G/N is countable then N is open in G. We say that a normal subgroup N is virtually dense in G if [G : N] is infinite and the closure of N is open in G. For example, when G is abelian or semisimple then G has a dense normal subgroup. In the latter case we can take N = i S i in G = i S i. In fact the existence of virtually dense normal subgroups is described by these examples. Corollary 35. A finitely generated profinite group has a virtually dense normal subgroup if and only if it has an open normal subgroup H which has an infinite abelian quotient or an infinite semisimple quotient. The key to proving the above results is the following result about finite groups proved in [55]. For a finite group Γ we denote the derived group by Γ and write Γ 0 for the intersection of the centralizers of the non-abelian simple chief factors of Γ. Theorem 36. [55] Let Γ be a finite group, H Γ 0 a normal subgroup of Γ, and {y 1,...,y r } a symmetric subset of Γ. If H y 1,...,y r = Γ y 1,...,y r = Γ then ( r ) f [H,Γ] = [H,y i ] i=1 where f = f(r,d(γ)) = O(r 6 d(γ) 6 ). If {y 1,...,y r } actually generates Γ then the above equality holds for every H (not necessarily inside Γ 0 ). Now Γ/Γ 0 is semisimple-by-(solubleofderived length 3), while Γ/Γ is abelian: so the theorem reduces certain problems to the case of semisimple groups and abelian groups. As an application let us indicate how to deduce Theorem 11 from Theorem 36. Part (2) of Theorem 11 follows just by setting H = N and y 1,...y d to be a symmetric generating set of Γ. Part (1) of Theorem 11 needs a little more work. For a finite d-generated group we set Γ := q. The index of Γ in is bounded in terms of d and q and so Γ can be generated by some f 1 (d,q) elements. Moreover we can choose a symmetric set y 1,...,y r with r bounded in terms of d,q such that each y i = x q i for some x i and y 1,...,y r generates Γ modulo Γ and modulo Γ 0. (Using a version of Theorem 11 for finite semisimple and finite soluble groups which were proved earlier) Then Theorem 36 with H = Γ 0 implies that every element of [Γ 0,Γ] is a product of boundedly many copies of [Γ 0,y i ]. Since [x,y i ] = y x i y i is a product of two q-th powers it follows that [Γ 0,Γ] is a product of boundedly many q-th powers. It remains to deal with Γ/[Γ 0,Γ] which is easy. The full details can be found in [55] Theorem??. An easy consequence of Theorem 36 is Corollary 37. Let G be a finitely generated profinite group and N a normal subgroup of G. If NG = NG 0 = G then N = G. Here G 0 is the intersection of all open normal subgroups M such that G/M is almost simple.

14 14 NIKOLAY NIKOLOV Indeed, wemaychooseelementsy 1,...,y 2d fromn suchthat y 1,...,y 2d projects onto G/G and G/G 0. The profinite analogue of Theorem 36 now implies that for the integer f defined there we have [G 0,G] = ( i [G 0,y i ]) f In particular [G 0,G] N since y i N. Therefore hence G = NG = N. G = [G,NG 0 ] [G,N][G,G 0 ] N Corollary 37 shows that if G has a strange normal subgroup, then either G/G or G/G 0 has one: and these groups are not so hard to understand. Let us illustrate this by proving Theorem 32 at least for profinite groups G. The general case is obtained by observing that if a compact group G has a finitely generated infinite image then either G/G 0 of G 0 has such image, where G 0 denotes the connected component of the identity in G. Now G/G 0 is a profinite group, while G 0 is a pro-lie group [29]; in the latter case an analogue of Proposition 38 below for Lie groups suffices to complete the proof. So let us assume that G is a profinite group with infinite finitely generated image I. By considering the closed subgroup of G containing preimages of the generators of I we reduce to the case when G is topologically finitely generated. Let I 1 be the intersection of all subgroups of finite index in I. Then I/I 1 is a residually finite countable image of G and therefore finite by the argument at the beginning of this section. Thus by replacing I with I 1 and G with the preimage of I 1 we may further assume that I has no finite images. In order to apply Corollary 37 we need to be able to understand the countable images of G/G 0, which is a semisimple by soluble profinite group. Proposition 38. Let G = i X S i be a finitely generated semisimple profinite group. Then any infinite image of G is uncountable. Assuming this we can complete the proof of Theorem 32. Let N be a normal subgroup of G such that G/N I is a finitely generated countable group without finite images. Then I = I and hence G N = G. Suppose that NG 0 < G, then G/G 0 maps onto a nontrivial factors of I which must be infinite. It follows that the group Ḡ = G/G 0 has an infinite finitely generated perfect quotient. Let V be the semisimple normal subgroup of Ḡ such that Ḡ/V is soluble of derived length 3. Clearly G/V cannot have a nontrivial perfect quotient, therefore V must have an infinite finitely generated quotient. This contradicts Proposition 38 and Theorem 32 follows. Finally let us indicate a proof of Proposition 38. This proceeds by describing the maximal normal subgroups of a semisimple profinite group G = i X S i. For this we need the following result of Liebeck and Shalev: Theorem 39 ([46]). There is a constant c with the following property: If S is a nonabelian finite simple group and C is a nontrivial conjugacy class of S then C n = S for some integer n clog S /log C.

15 ALGEBRAIC PROPERTIES OF PROFINITE GROUPS 15 Now let U be an ultrafilter on the index set X. We define a normal subgroup N U of G as follows: first define a function h : G [0,1] by h((g i )) = lim U log g Si i log S i where lim U denotes the ultralimit with respect to U, then set N U = h 1 U (0). Using Theorem 39, one shows that the subgroups N U are precisely the maximal proper normal subgroups of G. Proposition 38 is then deduced by eliminating the possibility H N U when G/H is countably infinite. 9. An application: locally compact totally disconnected groups Profinite groups appear as open subgroup of locally compact totally disconnected (abbreviated lctd) groups. By contrast with profinite groups Corollary 12 does not hold even for very nice lctd groups as the following example noticed by D. Segal shows. Let G be the group G = 1 a c 0 1 b a,b Z,c Z p where Z has the discrete topology while Z p has the p-adic topology. Then G and its compact open subgroup Z p are both finitely generated topologically, however G = Z < Z p is not closed in G. However the situation may be different for topologically simple tdlc groups (i.e. groups which do not have a nontrivial normal closed subgroups). Perhaps the most natural question to ask is whether these groups are abstractly simple. Note that any non-trivial normal subgroup of a topologically simple group must be dense. In [14] Caprace and Monod pose the following Question 40. Is there a compactly generated, topologically simple locally compact group which has a proper dense normal subgroup? The methods from the previous section provide some information in the case when the topologically simple group is compactly generated and locally finitely generated (i.e its open compact subgroups are finitely generated). Proposition 41. Let L be a compactly generated, locally finitely generated tdlc group without compact normal subgroups. Let G be a compact open subgroup of L and let N be a dense normal subgroup of L. Then N G. In particular L is abstracty simple if and only if L is abstractly perfect. Proof: Suppose that L is generated by a compact set K. Without loss of generality we may assume that K = K 1 = GKG. Let G be the Schreier graph of L with respect to K and U. The vertices of G are {Ga a L} and the edges are the pairs (Ga,Gka) for k K. Our group L acts transitively on the vertices of G with stablizer of the vertex v 0 = G equal to G. By assumption L has no non-trivial compact normal subgroups hence the action of L on G is faithful. The valency at every vertex of G is K : U <, in particular there are only finitely possibilities for the upper composition factors of G (that is the composition factors of G/N for open normal subgroups N of G). We conclude that G/G 0 is finite while G/G has only finitely many nontrivial Sylow subgroups. It follows that there is a finite index

16 16 NIKOLAY NIKOLOV subgroup G > F > G such that for a closed subgroup M of G G = MF implies G = MG. Suppose N is a dense normal subgroup of L and put H = G N, then H is a dense normal subgroup of G. Since F and G 0 are open subgroups of G we have that G = G 0 H = FH. Thus we can find finitely many elements y 1,...y r H such that y 1,...y r G 0 = G = y 1,...y r F and the last equality implies that y 1,...y r G = G. We can now deduce as in the proof of Corollary 37 that H > [G 0,G]. Finally G = [G,HG 0 ] H[G,G 0 ] H as before. Since N is dense in L we have that L/N = GN/N = G/H is abelian. In [8] the authors study commensurators of profinite groups and one aspect of this is the following question: Which profinite groups can be the compact open subgroups of topologically simple tdlc groups? By the proof of Proposition 41 such a profinite group G has only finitely many different upper composition factors. In particular G cannot be a free profinite group. It is shown in [8] that the above question has a positive answer for the Grigorchuk group and negative for the Nottingham group. Another negative answer was proved by G. Willis [82]: a soluble profinite group cannot be an open subgroup of a compactly generated simple tdlc group, moreover the condition of being compactly generated is necessary. The following concrete question is asked in [8]. Question 42. Let G be the free pro-p on 2 generators. Can G be an open subgroup in a topologically simple lctd group? Next we discuss some of the main ingredients in the proof of Theorem Elements of the proof of Theorem 36 The most natural approach is to use induction on Γ. Suppose for example that H in Theorem 36 is an minimal normal subgroup of Γ, with the property that H = [H,Γ]. Then a necessary condition on the y i is that at least one of the sets [H,y i ] is not too small, i.e. y i does not centralize a subgroup of H of big Hausdorff dimension. Now either H is elementary abelian and then each y i acts on H as a linear transformation, or H is a direct product of isomorphic simple groups and y i acts by permuting the factors and twisting them with some automorphisms. This motivates the following definition: Let the group Y generated by a set Y act on either (1) a set Ω, or (2) a vector space V. In situation (1) we say that Y has (ǫ,k) fixed point property on Ω if at least k of the elements of Y fix at most (1 ǫ) Ω of the points in Ω. Similarly in situation (2) Y has the (ǫ,k) fixed space property on V if at least k of the elements of Y have centralizer of dimension at most (1 ǫ)dimv. One of the main new ingredients is a result which guarantees that a set Y Γ has the (ǫ, k)-fixed point and fixed space property on the non-central chief factors of Γ provided Y generates Γ modulo Γ and modulo Γ 0 :

17 ALGEBRAIC PROPERTIES OF PROFINITE GROUPS 17 Theorem 43. Let Γ be a finite group with a subset Y such that Γ = Γ Y = Γ 0 Y. Then Y has the ε/2-fsp on every non-central abelian chief factor of Γ and the ε-fgp on every non-abelian chief factor of Γ inside Γ 0, where ε = min This allows to prove the following. { 1 1+6δ, 1 Y Theorem 44. Let G be a group and K G 0 a normal subgroup of G. Suppose that G = K y 1,,...,y r = G y 1,,...,y r. Then there exist elements x ij K such that G = y xij i i = 1,...,r, j = 1,...,f 0 where f 0 = f 0 (r,d(g)) = O(rd(G) 2 ). Let usnowconsiderthesitutation whereh in Theorem36hasaminimal elementary abelian subgroup M Γ with [M,Γ] = M. Suppose h H. By induction and considering the smaller group Γ/M we may assume that we have found elements a i,j H such that for some m M we have hm = f i=1 j=1 r [a i,j,y j ] Let us replace a i,j by a i,j x i,j with some x i,j M. By collecting the terms involving a i,j to the left we reach the equation (1) m = f i=1j=1 r [x i,j,z i,j] where each z i,j is specific conjugates of y j depending on x i,j and a i,j and similarly for x i,j. In order to be able to solve this equation in terms of x i,j we assume that the elements y i,j generate G/M and put this condition in the induction hypothesis for Γ, see Key Theorem in [55] Theorem But then when solving (1) for M we need to ensure that the extra condition that z i,j generate Γ is satisfiied. We do this by counting the solutions of (1) and comparing this with the number of conjuagtes of y i whcih fail to generated Γ. The counting is relatively straightforward when M is a minimal normal subgroup as above (i.e. M is abelian and M = [M,Γ]) but if [M,Γ] = 1 or when M is semisimple it gets much more complicated. To deal with the situation when M Z(Γ) the methods developed earlier in [56] suffice. When M is semisimple we need better lower estimates for the number of solutions to the equation (1) than the ones in [56]. This leads us to the subject of growth in finite simple groups and the following generalization of the Gowers trick by Babai, Nikolov and Pyber in [6]: Theorem 45. For a finite group G let l = l(g) denote the minimal degree of a nontrivial real representation of G. Suppose now that k 3 and A 1,...,A k are subsets of G with the property that k i=1 A i G k /l k 2. Then k i=1 A i = G. This is a key ingredient in the proof of Theorem 47 below. To make sure that the conditions of the Gowers trick are met we prove the following result concerning twisted commutators of finite simple groups: }.

18 18 NIKOLAY NIKOLOV For automorphisms α,β of a group G and x,y S we write T α,β (x,y) = x 1 y 1 x α y β. Theorem 46. There exist ε > 0 and D N such that if S is a finite quasisimple group with l = l(s) > 2, α,β Aut(S) (D), and X S (2D) has size at least (1 ε) S (2D), then T α,β(x) l 3/5 S Note that there are only finitely many quasisimple groups with l(s) 2. The last two theorems combined with some further work give Theorem 47. Let D and ǫ be the constants introduced in Theorem 46. Let N be a finite quasisemisimple group with at least 3 non-abelian composition factors. Let y 1,...,y 10 be m-tuples of automorphisms of N. Assume that for each i, the group y i permutes the set Ω of quasisimple factors of N transitively and that y i has the (k,η)-fpp on Ω, where kη 4+2D. For each i let W(i) N (m) be a subset with W(i) (1 ε/6) N m. Then 10 i=1 where φ(i) : N (m) N is given by W(i)φ(i) = N (x 1,...,x m )φ(i) = m [x i,y ij ]. This last theorem provides the induction step in the proof of Theorem 36 in the case when M H is a nonabelian minimal normal subgroup of G. i=1 11. Growth in finite simple groups A common theme in this survey has been product decompositions of finite and profinite groups, and how these relate to algebraic properties of infinite groups. Most useful are results of the following kind: Suppose that Γ is a finite group and X 1,...X n are subsets of Γ. If n log X i > Clog Γ i=1 for some constant C and X i generate G we want to deduce that X 1 X n = Γ. Of course this result in not true in all finite groups, the cyclic abelian groups being a counterexample. However when we turn to the other extreme, finite simple groups then we expect positive answers. For example if X i are all equal to a conjugacy class in Γ and Γ is a finite simple group this is the content of Theorem 39. A very influential problem in the area is the Babai Conjecture [7]: Conjecture 48. There is a constant C > 0 such that if S is a finite simple group and X = X 1 is a generating set for S then the diameter of the Cayley graph Cay(S,X) is at most (log S ) C.